GeneralThis is a lens I had very briefly referred to during a comparative review of 5 normal primes for Nikon. I had then said that it wasn't anything special in terms of performance. I was afterwards not happy about the way I had expressed myself, but I decided to let the text stand. After all, there was a particular context: I was referring to the "best of the best", and the Tamron was at the bottom of the list that included the superlative Zeiss Otus. I decided, instead of editing that text, to simply offer a dedicated page for this interesting lens.
|Difficult scene for focusing, but the Tamron had no problem.|
Pros/Cons+ optical stabilization on a normal prime? Why not, I'll take it.
+ focuses rather close for a normal prime (~1ft/30cm)
+ superb construction quality (better than the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4)
- somewhat expensive
- although the image quality is fine, it doesn't justify the price tag. Similar as the (cheaper) competition.
- bigger and heavier than the (cheaper) competition.
Intended UsersGreat for:
- if you have unsteady hands or you expect to be shooting hand-held in very low light, the stabilization helps quite a bit.
- a reliable all-around normal lens. Good for hiking and long walks outdoors.
- indoor concerts or low-light urban photography
- portraits. Short (especially on FX), and I wasn't crazy about the bokeh.
- those on a strict budget. I don't see the point of paying almost 3 times the price of the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8. No, optical stabilization isn't worth it.
- those not on a strict budget! I'm not joking, if you can spare another couple of hundred dollars, the Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 is a much better solution if you want something clearly better than the average prime.
|Somewhat busy bokeh, at least in certain conditions|